Saturday, October 19, 2013

A Stable Universe - In Atheism or Theism?

In my last article I discussed the "God of the gaps" accusation levied against creationists and IDists. A "refutation" that is common all across the scope of Darwinian influenced minds.

I showed that, in fact, it is the Darwinists that use "gap" arguments, or arguments from ignorance and not the designists at all.

Now at the end of that article I quoted professor Richard Lewontin on his absolute adherence to materialism in all things "scientific".

Here is the quote again, followed by my comments on the last sentence of it:

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of
its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its
extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of
the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we
have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that
the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a
material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that
we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an
apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material
explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying
to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we
cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. The eminent Kant scholar Lewis
Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in
anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any
moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that miracles may
happen.”– Richard Lewontin, 1997. Billions and billions of demons, The
New York Review, p. 31, 9 January 1997 (review of Carl Sagan’s The
Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark).- Dr. Richard
Lewontin, Geneticist, Harvard University

Lewotin makes a perfectly foolish unthinking statement at the end when
he says that appealing to an omnipotent deity allows that at any moment
the regularities of nature may be ruptured. Really?

Lewontin fails to see that this is perfectly true for atheism, not theism!

Under
atheism there are no absolutes, there is no absolute truth, so no one
cannot even know anything for sure -including no scientists, such as
Lewontin. Now if there are no absolutes THEN it would be true that we
allow that the regularities of nature may change any & every moment.
The laws may dissolve, mathematics is no longer certain, nothing
remains! Nothing is certain under atheism's obligatory relativism.
Nothing can be known as objectively true in atheism, including atheism
itself! This is standard atheist dogma and if atheism were true, then
they would be right in claiming this.

However, under
theism, what is the reason that the regularities may be ruptured? The
only possible reason would be the will of the deity. But then why
would an intelligent creator simply screw everything he made from one
day to the next? What reason would he have?

Moreover, even if he did,
would mankind ever know it? Highly unlikely, well at least not for more than a few seconds. We would almost certainly disappear in some sort of total cosmic implosion if only 1 of the "fine tuning" constants were to be radically altered by the deity. And who would be left to give a damn for humanity?

In
theism, we infer through multitudes of inferences and the very state of the cosmos, that the intelligence of the creator is infinite (just
look at what he made) and that his moral nature is the very foundation
of all morality.

Worse, Lewontin's statement is in fact ludicrous, since we
already have ample testimony that in fact the laws of the nature are
universal, stable and constant since the beginning of all human history. Simply because we have something we call "science" and it works!

Now
to prove how utterly asinine atheists can get on this specific point, lets read
the "expert" atheist version; one that, if true, literally turns Lewontin's inane statement upside down:

"There
is no logical impossibility in the hypothesis that the world sprang
into being five minutes ago, exactly as it then was, with a population
that "remembered" a wholly unreal past. There is no logically necessary
connection between events at different times; therefore nothing that is
happening now or will happen in the future can disprove the hypothesis
that the world began five minutes ago." — Bertrand Russell, The Analysis of Mind,1921, pp. 159- 60

Can
you see that the truly unstable, unreliable, utterly mutable universe
Lewontin imagines under a deity, is actually the highly probable state
of nature if atheism were true and not at all if theism is true!?
Thank God it isn't!

Why else would Einstein consider that one of the most surprising attributes of nature to be that it is understandable?

"The eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility ... The fact that it is comprehensible is a miracle"-Einstein: His Life and Universe by Walter Isaacson, p. 462